To take just one example, the entry about Melissa Farley has been heavily edited by a pornographer who sometimes uses the pseudonym Iamcuriousblue. He also shows up numerous times in the edits to the Catharine MacKinnon entry and virtually every place feminism is mentioned. That any judge, or anyone generally, would think these accounts of feminism are unbiased or authoritative is truly scary.I'll take on the stuff about Wikipedia later on my own blog, since that's kind of peripheral to the subject here. (But I'll just say that I'd be happy to scrutinize my record of writing balanced entries and general adherence to the rules of Wikipedia, particularly compared to the past contributions of Nikki Craft, whom Bartow posits as being driven away by the evol anti-feminists who inhabit the Wikiverse.)
I think what is interesting, though, is that she calls me a "pornographer". Not that I find that an insult – I'm honored by the label, actually. However considering that I've never shot a single sexy photo, or a single minute of porn video, or even published or posted an erotic story in a public forum, I'm afraid I have to decline that title.
Then again, as we discussed in a recent entry or two, high-falutin feminist academics aren't always known for getting their facts straight.